Frank Feighan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 88: To ask the Minister for Finance if he will guarantee the citizens of Ireland that proper procedures were followed at all times in relation to the take-over of the Quinn Group and the administration of Quinn Insurance and that the Financial Regulator did not inappropriately interfere with this process; and in view of the amount of taxpayers' money that is at stake, if he is confident that these procedures will stand up to any scrutiny in a court of law. [20674/11]

Michael Noonan (Limerick City, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the outset, it should be noted that the Joint Administrators were appointed by the High Court at the request of the Central Bank because of concerns about the solvency position of the company under the 1983 Insurance No.2 Act. These concerns have proved to be valid based on the recently published financial results for QIL for 2009 which indicated very serious losses much of which was related to underwriting. Therefore the Minister is of the view that the right decision was made by the Central Bank at the time to go to the Courts as policyholder protection is of paramount importance in such a situation. Once the Joint Administrators were appointed, it was they who were responsible for deciding on how best the interests of policyholders could be protected and how the company could be returned to a sound commercial footing. In this regard they were required to update the High Court on a regular basis. The sale of the business was an integral part of their overall strategy and as you are aware all interested parties were invited to submit bids which were duly considered leading ultimately to the selection of a preferred bidder. During this process neither the Minister nor the Government had any role in the selection of who this preferred bidder should be.

The decision in relation to the appointment of the Share Receiver by Anglo to the broader Quinn Group was very much a commercial one and I in my role as Minister for Finance had no input into this matter. My understanding is that other scenarios might well have prompted court action to put the Group into receivership with the potential for immediate significant job losses. By comparison the appointment of a Share Receiver gives the Group grounds for considerable hope of a viable future. This viable future however depends to a large degree on the willingness of everybody, particularly those engaged in several recent negative events, to engage wholeheartedly with the new ownership arrangements, because if this does not materialise then over time it is likely to have a negative impact on the trading performance of the Group.

In conclusion, I believe that the recent steps taken to sell the QIL business to the Liberty Mutual/Anglo joint venture and the decision to appoint a share receiver to the wider group were the only feasible options particularly from a job protection perspective.